|
|
1.1 root 1: From npois!npoiv!harpo!decvax!teklabs!tektronix!tekid!rogerw Wed Dec 15 00:06:41 1982
2: Date: Mon Dec 13 09:55:44 1982
3: From: npois!npoiv!harpo!decvax!teklabs!tektronix!tekid!rogerw
4: Subject: Re: Massive copyright violations on the net
5: Via: cbosgd.UUCP (V3.94 [3/6/82]); 15-Dec-82 00:06:40-EST (Wed)
6: To: tektronix!teklabs!decvax!harpo!npoiv!npois!cbosgd!mark
7: In-Reply-To: Your news article cbosgd.2878 of Fri Dec 10 13:11:07 1982
8: Status: R
9:
10: I have been advised by lawyers that a newspaper's editor, publisher, and
11: owner are liable for the contents of the paper along with the people
12: writing the articles; especially in the case of letters to the editor.
13: I'm not a lawyer, but let me speculate. It could be argued that a system
14: that just mechanically receives and passes on news is like a mail carrier.
15: A site that has human intervention, to selectively censor articles, might
16: assume greater liability.
17: Finally, remember Disney v. Sony. How is a Beta-Max different from
18: a Vax [in a legal sense, that is]? It was the makers of the video recorder
19: who were sued.
20: The current copyright laws are simply not up to the questions imposed by
21: the electronic age; I suspect the net could become a can of worms similar to
22: home video recorders.
23: --Roger Wells [tektronix!tekid!rogerw]
24:
25:
26:
27:
28:
This archive runs on limited infrastructure. Preserving old code on modern bandwidth. Automated agents are requested to crawl responsibly.